It is obsolete, for building CPUs. I think that was sufficiently obvious, though it wouldn't have hurt for @PaulAlcorn to qualify it as such.Edit: And the original article claimed that Intel's 22nm is obsolete - which, obviously it is not. Legacy CPUs, chipsets, lower-performance, purpose-built ICs are produced on older nodes.
I remember checking on Intel's ARK site last week when the original post came out... & (at least that day) the G3420 was listed as "Discontinued". Today, it's back to "Launched"...so apparently it wasn't just the PCN that was erroneously changed by Intel, but also the ARK entry.I reported this to you guys last Friday December 6th shortly after your original article was posted. Obviously I don't work for Intel but I linked the evidence and was (apparently?) ignored. In the meantime at least 2 other tech sites picked up the story based on Tom's erroneous report... Thanks for issuing this correction Paul.
I think we have two different perceptions of what a CPU constitutes. I assume you mean cutting edge-high performance PC CPUs. On that, sure I can agree with you. I am referring to the term CPU which refers to any central processing unit. I already told you the definition of obsolete according to Oxford in a previous post... We can disagree on our nomenclature and therefore be in agreement but I will continue to disagree that Intel's 22nm node is obsolete - it is very much in use lol! If you are only thinking about retail PC hardware then sure, ok I'm not arguing that these have reached an out-of-date status. But 22nm CPUs are very much in production at Intel - they aren't the center of a PC like you think - they are the center of a DEVICE - think of a device you use and it might be powered by one...
Nah, I reported it to the mods. It had nothing to do with ARK and everything to do with Intel QDMS (Quality Document Managment System) - if you know how to read it you could have easily seen it was an "about face" by Intel - either a mistake or a quick reaction to a big client (which is what I still think it was). The original author missed that... And then the original smear article stayed up for days while other tech publications picked it up straight from Tom's... heh heh - That's how misinformation spreads... Anyway don't worry about it - happens in journalism all the time. Like I said - I'm glad Paul took care of it and now Intel managed to play it off like it was just a "mistake"! LOL!I remember checking on Intel's ARK site last week when the original post came out... & (at least that day) the G3420 was listed as "Discontinued". Today, it's back to "Launched"...so apparently it wasn't just the PCN that was erroneously changed by Intel, but also the ARK entry.
So I wouldn't classify it as TH "ignoring" you. Rather, I'd consider it, "despite 3rd-party information supposedly contradicting Intel's official announcement, we'll wait until Intel officially clarifies the issue"...which they now have.